The Discrepancy and Agreement between Patient-Reported Percentage Pain Reduction and Calculated Percentage Pain Reduction in Chronic Pain Patients

Kód výsledku v IS VaVaI

<a href="https://www.isvavai.cz/riv?ss=detail&h=RIV%2F00216208%3A11110%2F23%3A10466074" target="_blank" >RIV/00216208:11110/23:10466074 - isvavai.cz</a>

Výsledek na webu

<a href="https://verso.is.cuni.cz/pub/verso.fpl?fname=obd_publikace_handle&handle=1KvPCcYvC" target="_blank" >https://verso.is.cuni.cz/pub/verso.fpl?fname=obd_publikace_handle&handle=1KvPCcYvC</a>

DOI - Digital Object Identifier

<a href="http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/neurolint15020034" target="_blank" >10.3390/neurolint15020034</a>

Jazyk výsledku

angličtina

Název v původním jazyce

The Discrepancy and Agreement between Patient-Reported Percentage Pain Reduction and Calculated Percentage Pain Reduction in Chronic Pain Patients

Popis výsledku v původním jazyce

Two derivatives of the numeric rating scale (NRS) and visual analog scale (VAS), namely patient-reported percentage pain reduction (PRPPR) and calculated percentage pain reduction (CPPR), are commonly used when evaluating pain reduction. A small number of studies have attempted to assess the agreement between PRPPR and CPPR. However, they have been limited in their scope by a focus on specific types of pain, or by their focus on specific treatment modalities. As far as the authors of this article are aware, this is the first study to assess the agreement between PRPPR and CPPR in chronic pain patients, as well as the first to assess how the duration of treatment affects the correlations between PRPPR and CPPR. The aim of this retrospective analysis was to determine whether the duration of treatment affects CPPR and PRPPR, and the discrepancy and agreement between the two. Additionally, the study assessed whether individual treatment modalities, or the lack there of, impacted the discrepancy and correlation between PRPPR and CPPR. The mean PRPPR and CPPR for the entire patient population were 59.98 and 40.71, respectively. The mean discrepancy between the two parameters was 19.27. The agreement between PRPPR and CPPR, as measured by the concordance correlation coefficient, was 0.984 (95% C.I., 0.982-0.986).

Název v anglickém jazyce

The Discrepancy and Agreement between Patient-Reported Percentage Pain Reduction and Calculated Percentage Pain Reduction in Chronic Pain Patients

Popis výsledku anglicky

Two derivatives of the numeric rating scale (NRS) and visual analog scale (VAS), namely patient-reported percentage pain reduction (PRPPR) and calculated percentage pain reduction (CPPR), are commonly used when evaluating pain reduction. A small number of studies have attempted to assess the agreement between PRPPR and CPPR. However, they have been limited in their scope by a focus on specific types of pain, or by their focus on specific treatment modalities. As far as the authors of this article are aware, this is the first study to assess the agreement between PRPPR and CPPR in chronic pain patients, as well as the first to assess how the duration of treatment affects the correlations between PRPPR and CPPR. The aim of this retrospective analysis was to determine whether the duration of treatment affects CPPR and PRPPR, and the discrepancy and agreement between the two. Additionally, the study assessed whether individual treatment modalities, or the lack there of, impacted the discrepancy and correlation between PRPPR and CPPR. The mean PRPPR and CPPR for the entire patient population were 59.98 and 40.71, respectively. The mean discrepancy between the two parameters was 19.27. The agreement between PRPPR and CPPR, as measured by the concordance correlation coefficient, was 0.984 (95% C.I., 0.982-0.986).

Druh

J_imp - Článek v periodiku v databázi Web of Science

CEP obor

—

OECD FORD obor

30103 - Neurosciences (including psychophysiology)

Projekt

—

Návaznosti

V - Vyzkumna aktivita podporovana z jinych verejnych zdroju

Rok uplatnění

2023

Kód důvěrnosti údajů

S - Úplné a pravdivé údaje o projektu nepodléhají ochraně podle zvláštních právních předpisů

Název periodika

Neurology international

ISSN

2035-8377

e-ISSN

2035-8377

Svazek periodika

15

Číslo periodika v rámci svazku

2

Stát vydavatele periodika

CH - Švýcarská konfederace

Počet stran výsledku

9

Strana od-do

560-568

Kód UT WoS článku

001015058900001

EID výsledku v databázi Scopus

2-s2.0-85163644829